Warren is Wrong on Weiss

I generally agree with Elizabeth Warren on policy and her set of beliefs on our banking system. On her opposition to President Obama's nominee to be Undersecretary of the Treasury for Domestic Policy, Antonio Weiss, I must simply disagree. The story:

Opposition has been mounting among Democrats. But it's the reasons and the people that are significant. There's no suggestion that there are any personal or professional or ethical problems with Weiss. He comes from the same cosmopolitan and progressive political and cultural background as most Democratic finance policy types (he even appears to be an underwriter of the Paris Review - a point that's been focused on by both sides). He also supports the big elements of Democratic fiscal policy, specifically higher tax rates for the wealthiest Americans. He's also a major Democratic donor. 

The problem is that he's from the Wall Street firm Lazard and has been involved in the sort of complex merger transactions - "companies buying and selling each other", as Warren put it in a speech earlier this week - often aimed at limiting tax liabilities. There's some dispute about how much he was involved in a particular deal - Burger King. 

In other words, Weiss is an upstanding citizen. He supports Democratic tax policy and is a Democratic donor. All good. The problem is that he's a creature of Wall Street and this particular part of it. And that is the problem. What's significant is that that did not use to be a problem. It's not too much to say that Weiss more or less fits the mold of numerous Democratic appointees under the Clinton and Obama administrations.

So the basic point here is this- there's nothing wrong with Weiss, except that he worked on Wall Street. That's what he did wrong, and that's why Warren is opposing him. I oppose her as a party person, and as an American on this.

First, the party front. The Democratic Party should not be the anti-bank or anti-business party. The Democratic Party should oppose predatory and bad behavior, and should support regulation of banks, but it should not be the anti-bank party. If Weiss, who seems to have very little really negative particulars on his nomination, is unacceptable, then Democrats are essentially saying anyone from Wall Street is out-of-bounds for any nomination. That is setting up an irrationally stupid hardline.

Second, the American front here. Killing a nomination because of what line of work someone went into is a really bad precedent to set. Who will want to serve? Beyond that, the problem with Wall Street was Congress setting looser and looser rules, which is a problem of Congress. People who work on Wall Street bring a certain set of skills and talents that do work well in the Treasury Department, and they should be considered, if they support regulating Wall Street and proper taxation. It appears that Weiss does. We don't want to live in a country where our finance system is a politically dirty word. We should be weary of it, not simply against it.

The opposition to this nomination seems politically petty. There are lots of problems with Wall Street, as there are with many other institutions and places, but we shouldn't disqualify an otherwise qualified nominee over that. This is not a good road for us to start down, and in the case of Weiss, it has no real sense. Is Warren's goal in fighting this nomination to make sure that no one from Wall Street ever again serves in an administration? That is a bad goal with no obvious policy improvements for the country.